New approaches to zoology: Plenary 2

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 433-437

Following the second session of the forum, we held a question and answer session facilitated by Paul Willis. The presentations covered by this plenary session were: Back to the future: Aerial surveillance from ‘blimps’ for ecology and conservation (Kye Adams et al. University of Wollongong) Using drones to monitor large and complex breeding bird colonies (Mitchell Lyons, University of NSW) Sniffing solutions to enhance koala conservation (Romane Cristescu et al. University of the Sunshine Coast) Collect, connect, upscale: revolutionising the uptake of citizen science in bird research and conservation (Micha Jackson, University of Queensland).

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 404-406

Following the first session of the forum, we held a question and answer session facilitated by Paul Willis. The presentations covered by this plenary session were: Unravelling the secret behaviour of animals using animal-borne camera (Catherine Herbert et al. Sydney University)Large-scale, low-cost monitoring of animal spatial movements: Motus and an automated radio-telemetry grid for Australian zoology (Andrea Griffin et al. Newcastle University)Camera trapping advances: into the new millennia (Paul Meek et al. NSW Dept of Primary Industry)Sound recorders and soundscapes (Paul Roe Queensland University of Technology)


2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 510-513

Following the fourth session of the forum, we held a question and answer session facilitated by Paul Willis. The presentations covered by this plenary session were: What can we do with poo: genetic analysis of scat samples to inform the conversation Tasmanian Devil? (Catherine Grueber et al. University of Sydney)Probing the sex life of the dragon. (Arthur Georges, University of Canberra)Secrets from beyond extinction; unlocking the thylacine genome. (Andrew Pask, University of Melbourne)The Oz Mammals genomics initiative: developing resources for mammal conservation. (Mark Eldridge et al. Australian Museum)


1990 ◽  
Vol 18 (1_part_1) ◽  
pp. 65-74
Author(s):  
John M. Frazier ◽  
Alan M. Goldberg

Biomedical endeavours can be divided into three major categories: research, education, and testing. Within the context of each of these categories, activities involving whole animals have made major contributions and will continue to do so in the future. However, with technological developments in the areas of biotechnology and computers, new methods are already reducing the use of whole animals in certain areas. This article discusses the general issues of alternatives and then focuses on the development of new approaches to toxicity testing.


PEDIATRICS ◽  
1960 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 883-883
Author(s):  
Carl C. Fischer

After reviewing the presentations of the four panelists and the informal question and answer period that followed, the following conclusions would seem to represent the consensus insofar as the panel is concerned: (1) The practice of pediatrics as a specialty would seem to be here to stay—at least insofar as can be presently judged. (2) The term "new" pediatrics is a misnomer in that many pediatricians have been practicing it for many years. Our present interest, then, lies not so much in a "new" or comprehensive pediatrics—but in better ways to accomplish it. (3) Our undergraduate and postgraduate training must be brought up to date in order to better equip the pediatrician of the future for the comprehensive practice of pediatrics as it exists in his community. (4) This does not necessarily mean more time or more formal training but rather better use of all available facilities, including participation in as well as full awareness and understanding of the emotional and social factors in the lives of the "little people" under their care.


2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 186-192
Author(s):  
Wendy Silver

Purpose Organizations will need HR departments that take bold new approaches if they are to weather the uncertainty and changes on the horizon. This paper aims to discuss what makes an organization or a leader BRAVE, and examples of HR professionals and organizations leading the way are provided to help readers bravely shape their own organizations. Design/methodology/approach This paper draws upon various real-life examples of organizations whose HR departments are leading the way. Findings Organizations need BRAVE HR professionals and leaders to create, implement and communicate key initiatives to ensure companies make decisions that support workplace cultures that people choose to join and remain a part of. Originality/value No amount of technology can replace the forward-thinking thought, communication and action that being BRAVE requires. This paper will help HR professionals gain a braver perspective.


1979 ◽  
pp. 137-169
Author(s):  
Kenneth A. Dahlberg
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (02) ◽  
pp. A10
Author(s):  
Helen Verploegen ◽  
Wessel Ganzevoort ◽  
Riyan van den Born

Digital citizen science projects differ greatly in their goals and design. Tensions arise when coordinators' design choices and conceptions of citizen science conflict with users' motivations and expectations. In this paper, we use a combination of qualitative methods to gain new insights into the ways citizen science is understood and implemented digitally. This includes a study into the affordances of two citizen science portals for bird observations, and qualitative interviews with users and coordinators of the portals. This reveals tensions related to data sharing, community hierarchies, and communicated expectations. Awareness of these tensions can benefit the future design of online citizen science projects.


2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-46
Author(s):  
Julie Lindsay

Connected and collaborative learning that leads to co-creation of ideas and solutions is imperative across all levels of education. To make the shift we want to see, we need to understand the pedagogy of online learning in a global context. This commentary shares an understanding of thought leaders who have developed and shared new approaches that take learning beyond the immediate environment sca olded by digital technologies. It also poses the question, "What if we collaborated as a global community?" and starts a conversation about new pedagogical approaches to support " at," connected learning. This is already happening now—the future is now— it’s time to connect the world.


Author(s):  
Natalya Ivanova ◽  
Maxim Shashkov

Currently Russia doesn't have a national biodiversity information system, and is still not a GBIF (Global Biodiversity Information Facility) member. Nevertheless, GBIF is the largest source of biodiversity data for Russia. As of August 2020, >5M species occurrences were available through the GBIF portal, of which 54% were published by Russian organisations. There are 107 institutions from Russia that have become GBIF publishers and 357 datasets have been published. The important trend of data mobilization in Russia is driven by the considerable contribution of citizen science. The most popular platform is iNaturalist. This year, the related GBIF dataset (Ueda 2020) became the largest one for Russia (793,049 species occurrences as of 2020-08-11). The first observation for Russia was posted in 2011, but iNaturalist started becoming popular in 2017. That year, 88 observers added >4500 observations that represented 1390 new species for Russia, 7- and 2-fold more respectively, than for the previous 6 years. Now we have nearly 12,000 observers, about 15,000 observed species and >1M research-grade observations. The ratio of observations for Tracheophyta, Chordata, and Arthropoda in Russia is different compared to the global scale. There are almost an equal amount of observations in the global iNaturalist GBIF dataset for these groups. At the same time in Russia, vascular plants make up 2/3rds of the observations. That is due to the "Flora of Russia" project, which attracted many professional botanists both as observers and experts. Thanks to their activity, Russia has a high proportion of research-grade observations in iNaturalist, 78% versus 60% globally. Another consequence of wide participation by professional researchers is the high rate of species accumulation. For some taxonomic groups conspicuous species were already revealed. There are about 850 bird species in Russia of which 398 species were observed in 2018, and only 83 new species in 2019. Currently, the number of new species recorded over time is decreasing despite the increase in observers and overall user activity. Russian iNaturalist observers have shared a lot of archive photos (taken during past years). In 2018, it was nearly 1/4 of the total number of observations and about 3/4 of new species for the year, with similar trends observed during 2019. Usually archive photos are posted from December until April, but the 2020 pandemic lockdown spurred a new wave of archive photo mobilisation in April and May. There are many iNaturalist projects for protected areas in Russia: 27 for strict nature reserves and national parks, and about 300 for others. About 100,000 observations (7.5% of all Russian observations) from the umbrella project "Protected areas of Russia" represent >34% of the species diversity observed in Russia. For some regions, e.g., Novosibirsk, Nizhniy Novgorod and Vladimir Oblasts, almost all protected areas are covered by iNaturalist projects, and are often their only source of available biodiversity data. There are also other popular citizen science platforms developed by Russian researchers. The first one is the Russian birdwatching network RU-BIRDS.RU. The related GBIF dataset (Ukolov et al. 2019) is the third largest dataset for Russia (>370,000 species occurrences). Another Russian citizen science system is wildlifemonitoring.ru, which includes thematic resources for different taxonomic groups of vertebrates. This is the crowd-sourced web-GIS maintained by the Siberian Environmental Center NGO in Novosibirsk. It is noteworthy that iNaturalist activities in Russia are developed more as a social network than as a way to attract volunteers to participate in scientific research. Of 746 citations in the iNaturalist dataset, only 18 articles include co-authors from Russia. iNaturalist data are used for the management of regional red lists (in the Republic of Bashkortostan, Novosibirsk Oblast and others), and as an additional information source for regional inventories. RU-BIRDS data were used in the European Russia Breeding Bird Atlas and the new edition of the European Breeding Bird Atlas. In Russia, citizen science activities significantly contribute to filling gaps in the global biodiversity map. However, Russian iNaturalist observations available through GBIF originate from the USA. It is not ideal, because the iNaturalist GBIF dataset is growing rapidly, and in the future it will represent more than all other datasets for Russia combined. In our opinion, iNaturalist data should be repatriated during the process of publishing through GBIF, as it is implemented for the eBird dataset (Levatich and Ligocki 2020).


Author(s):  
Kerrie Reading

The cultural revolution of 1968 paved the way for many artists to reconsider how and where theatre was made. Community theatre gained currency and one company who became prominent during this cultural shift was Welfare State, later Welfare State International. They were one of the theatre companies who focused not only on a community theatre aesthetic but a grassroot one. I examine the radicality of community theatre and consider the efficacy of the historical approaches to engaging with communities in a (Post-)Covid world. I acknowledge and explore the shifting understanding of communities and assert that a deeper engagement is needed to foster collectivity (Tannahill 2016; Fişek 2019; Weston 2020; Bartley 2021). To reconsider the role that theatre may play in the future, I focus on a grassroot approach to community-led work and posit that location will be a key component to how theatre is made as we emerge from a pandemic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document